Compartmentalization of sodium in the human brain: a mini-review of 23Na-MRI methods

Sodium magnetic resonance imaging is a non-invasive technique that provides information about sodium levels in tissues. It has significant applications in brain research due to the important role of sodium in both normal brain function and pathological processes. Total sodium concentration is the most widely used derived metric; it offers insights into sodium content across different brain regions. However, the functional role of sodium is closely linked to its distribution within intra- and extracellular spaces. Sodium osmotic homeostasis affects the intracellular volume fraction, a parameter that can be altered in various neurological disorders. Unfortunately, distinguishing intracellular from extracellular sodium nuclear magnetic resonance signals is challenging, even with the use of contrast agents. In recent years, several methodologies have been proposed to study sodium compartmentalization in humans, typically involving tailored acquisition techniques and modeling approaches. This mini-review provides a brief overview of the challenges, methodologies, and potential applications of compartmentalized sodium MR imaging in human neuroscience.

Introduction

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a non-invasive imaging technique widely used in clinical practice. Conventional MRI is based on hydrogen nuclei because of their large gyromagnetic ratio and abundance in the human body. Notwithstanding the ubiquitous presence of ¹H-based MRI and its flexibility for multiple contrasts, other nuclei can offer insights into specific mechanisms. In recent years, the use of heteronuclear MRI, and in particular, of sodium MRI, has significantly expanded. The dynamics of sodium is crucial for several physiological processes, including neuronal excitability, synaptic transmission, and cellular energy metabolism; indeed, approximately 15% of the gray matter energy budget and 44% of the white matter ATP turnover is believed to be used only to maintain the resting potential, neglecting signaling. Overall, up to 50% of the cortical energy budget is assigned to Na⁺/K⁺ ATPase [1] and is thus needed to maintain sodium and potassium concentration gradients across the cellular membrane. For sodium, the intracellular and extracellular concentrations are approximately 10–15 mM and 140 mM, respectively [2, 3]. Dysfunctions in sodium homeostasis are associated with various neurological conditions, including multiple sclerosis (MS), Alzheimer’s disease (AD), stroke, epilepsy, and brain tumors [4]. Therefore, sodium represents a promising biomarker [5].

Sodium is the most abundant cation, providing the second strongest nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) signal in the human body after hydrogen, but its lower gyromagnetic ratio (11.3 MHz/T), lower abundance in the human brain, and nuclear spin of 3/2 imply a sensitivity which is only 9.3% of that of the proton. These factors lead to a poor signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) [2], which is partially compensated by the use of ultra-high field strengths (7 T ad above) [6–9]. Sodium is characterized by a quadrupole magnetic moment, leading to two distinct T₂ relaxation times: a slow component of 15–40 m and a fast component of 0.5–8 ms [10–13]. The fast component accounts for approximately 60% of the total sodium NMR signal, requiring MR sequences with very short echo time (TE).

After the first pioneering sodium studies on humans and intact animals, performed in the early 1980s [14, 15], the feasibility of ²³Na-MRI in clinical settings has benefited from recent advances in MRI technology and acquisition strategies. In particular, non-Cartesian k-space sampling offers advantages in terms of spatial resolution and acquisition time [16], while ultrashort TE (UTE) or zero TE (ZTE) sequences allow the detection of the short T₂ tissue components [17]. UTE sequences begin the acquisition with a minimal delay after the excitation pulse [18], while in ZTE sequences, the sampling gradients are turned on before the radiofrequency (RF) excitation pulse. In ZTE sequences, the center of the k-space is crossed at zero echo time, and due to the switching of hardware from the transmit to receive mode, the center of the k-space is not sampled. Different strategies have been developed to overcome this problem, such as single-point acquisitions (PETRA) [19]. UTE and ZTE acquisition techniques can be customized in terms of SNR, total acquisition time, and point spread function by adapting the density of the k-space points. Examples include density-adapted radial sequence [20], 3D cones [21], twisted projection imaging (TPI) [16, 22], and FLORET [23]. Non-Cartesian sequence reconstruction methods use regridding, which involves interpolating the sampled data points in a rectilinear grid [24], and performing fast Fourier transform (FFT) or non-uniform FFT [12] on the regridded data [25].

Sodium compartmentalization

Sodium MRI of the brain can follow different approaches according to the information of interest. The basic approach treats the brain as a single compartment and uses UTE or ZTE sequences to collect spin-density weighted (SDW) ²³Na MR data. Then, a calibration is performed in order to determine the tissue sodium concentration (TSC). However, changes in TSC can be the result of independent changes within the intracellular and extracellular compartments (IC and EC, respectively). Moreover, pathologies are often associated with changes in the volume fraction [26]. Distinguishing IC from EC sodium requires a combination of acquisition techniques and mathematical models. Most experimental approaches exploit the different relaxation times between bound sodium and free sodium [27], assuming that the intracellular component is mainly composed of bound sodium. Being generally suppression techniques, that is, techniques that selectively suppress or filter a component of the signal, they tend to suffer from low SNR and incomplete suppression.

Sequences

Some sequences have been introduced to isolate IC sodium, but their effectiveness is still debated. These include triple quantum filtering (TQF), double single-quantum (SQ) acquisition, inversion recovery (IR), and bi-exponential weighting.

TQF

The sodium nucleus is a spin 3/2 system with four degenerate spin states (3/2, ½, −½, and −3/2), and is thus characterized by a quadrupolar moment. The transition between the levels can occur via single, double, or triple quantum coherence; SQ relaxation involving the ±3/2 states (outer levels) is faster (T_2short) than the relaxation involving the inner levels (T_2long). However, if sodium is free (that is, the motional correlation time is much smaller than the Larmor period), the two exponential decays degenerate to a single, longer decay time [13].

The TQF sequence consists of three excitation pulses with the same flip angle and three different phases. The delays between pulses create higher-order coherences, and the read-out signal consists of contributions from all coherence pathways, which can be selected by phase cycling or gradients. The goal is to retain the signal from bound sodium (intracellular) [28]. The intracellular sodium molar fraction (ISMF) and the TSC can be measured directly with MRI, while the intracellular sodium concentration (ISC) and the intracellular volume fraction can be obtained by the combination of the first two quantities (see the Mathematical models section). These parameters can give complementary information about tissue state: for example, an increase of TSC and ISC with no increase of ISMF can follow cellular death, while an increase of ISMF with no increase of TSC is associated with cell swelling [29]. TQF presents several problems: low signal from filtering, high SAR from the multiple RF pulses, and the dependence on T₂ leads to low SNR, long acquisition times, and poor quantification. Fiege et al. proposed a method for simultaneous acquisition of single quantum and TQF to reduce total scan time, called SISTINA [30], which was later optimized and enhanced to include relaxometry [31, 32].

Dual SQ acquisition

Bound (intracellular) sodium is characterized by a bi-exponential decay with a T_2short component amounting to approximately 60% of the signal [7, 33–41]; the contribution of the T_2long component can be obtained by subtracting an SQ image acquired with a short echo time, where the T_2short component is suppressed, from one obtained with an ultrashort echo time, including signals from nearly all sodium nuclei. This technique is characterized by lower SAR and higher SNR than TQF at the expense of incomplete suppression of the T_2long signal [27].

IR

Inversion recovery acquisition is a widespread technique used to suppress the signal coming from a specific compartment, exploiting different T₁ relaxations between tissues. The sequence is a standard spin echo preceded by a 180° RF preparation pulse, where the excitation pulse is applied at the specific inversion time (TI) corresponding to the minimum magnetization in the compartment to suppress. While the extracellular space is rich in molecules, it is less dense than cytoplasm. Thus, EC T₁ is expected to be longer than IC T₁ [42], allowing IR-based selective suppression; in IR-based suppression, SAR can be high, SNR low, and suppression incomplete. However, long (soft) inversion pulses reduce SAR. In sodium MRI, relaxation during long RF pulses cannot be ignored because of very low T₂. It has been shown that by tailoring the duration of a soft inversion pulse, the different relaxation properties of IC and EC compartments allow for efficient extracellular signal attenuation while increasing intracellular magnetization at the EC-nulling TI (Soft Inversion Recovery FLuid Attenuation, SIRFLA) [42]. In vivo acquisitions at 4.7 T showed an SNR of 18 for brain tissues and an SNR of 3 for the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) [43].

Bi-exponential weighting

Another approach is to differentiate between bound and free sodium by exploiting the differences in transverse relaxation [44]. The method is still based on multiple-quantum filtering techniques but with the benefit of improved SNR. Two images with different contrasts are acquired and subtracted to generate a bi-exponential weighted image contrast [44]. The first image is an SDW acquired after the first 90° RF pulse, containing the contribution of all sodium ions, and the second one is a single quantum filtering (SQF) acquired after a second 90° RF pulse, containing mostly signals from mono-exponentially (free) relaxing sodium. The difference image can be calculated as follows [44]:

${\mathrm{S}}_{\mathrm{DIM}}={\mathrm{S}}_{\text{SDW}}–\mathrm{v}{\mathrm{S}}_{\text{SQF}},$

where S indicates the signal, DIM is the difference image method, and v is a weighting factor that takes into account the signal losses between the two acquisitions due to T₂* relaxation, namely:

$v=\frac{\exp \left(-\frac{{TE}_1}{T_2^{*}}\right)}{\exp \left(-\frac{{\tau }_1}{T_2^{*}}\right)\exp \left(-\frac{{\tau }_2}{T_2^{*}}\right)\exp \left(-\frac{{TE}_2}{T_2^{*}}\right),}$

where TE1 and TE2 are the two echo times of the acquisitions, and ${\tau }_1$ and ${\tau }_2$ are the preparation time and the evolution time, respectively. With this method, 3D biexponentially weighted ²³Na images can be obtained with an increase of up to 200% of SNR compared to TQF [44].

Mathematical models

An estimate of tissue-specific sodium concentration can be obtained by applying mathematical models to data acquired with the appropriate weighting. The most used method considers two compartments, IC and EC, but the inclusion of more compartments has been proposed. Madelin et al. [2] developed a three-compartment model by dividing the brain into IC, EC, and a solid-like compartment constituted of cell membranes and nuclei, proteins, and other large molecules. The model was further developed by Gilles et al. [45] to include a CSF compartment.

2CM model

The two-compartment (2CM) approach [8, 46] partitions the tissue into homogeneous IC and EC compartments, characterized by volume $V_i$, sodium amount $M_i$, and sodium concentration $C_i$ (i = 1 is IC, and i = 2 is EC). The total sodium concentration TSC ($C_T$ in the equations) is

$C_T=\frac{M_1+M_2.}{V_1+V_2}$

The intracellular volume fraction η and the intracellular sodium molar fraction ISMF (χ in the equations) can thus be written as

$\eta =\frac{V_1}{V_1+V_2}=\frac{C_2-C_T}{C_2-C_1.}$

$\chi =\frac{M_1}{M_1+M_2}=\frac{C_1}{C_T}\eta .$

Combining these equations, it is possible to obtain $C_1$ and η in terms of $C_T$, χ, and $C_2$ [29]:

$\left\{\begin{array}{c}{C}_1=\frac{\chi C_T{C}_2}{C_2-{\left(1-\chi \right)C}_T}.\\ \eta =1-\left(1-\chi \right)\frac{C_T}{C_2}\end{array}\right.$

Total sodium concentration $C_T$ and intracellular sodium molar fraction χ are measurable with MRI (e.g., using TQF). $C_2$ is assumed to be constant in a range between 136 mmol/L and 142 mmol/L [29].

3CM model

The three-compartment model (3CM)adds to IC and EC a solid compartment (SC, index i = 3) that includes cell membranes, nuclei, proteins, and other metabolites. The solid compartment has no sodium content ($M_3=0$ mol and $C_3=0$ mmol/L) [2, 47, 48]. The volumes can be expressed by equating $V_1+V_2$ to the fluid (water) volume fraction $w$, that is generally 0.7 in the white matter and 0.85 in the grey matter and can be considered equal to 0.775 for the total brain [49].

$V_1=\left(\mathrm{w}-\alpha \right)V_{T.}$

$V_2=\alpha V_{T.}$

$V_3=\left(1-w\right)V_{T.}$

where $\alpha$ is the extracellular volume fraction. With the 3CM model, the unknown variables are the extracellular volume fraction $\alpha$ and the intracellular sodium concentration $C_1$. Two sodium measurements are required to estimate these quantities, unsuppressed and suppressed in the EC (e.g., via IR). Considering the TSC as S1, and the IC signal as S2, C1 and α can be calculated as [12]:

$\alpha =\frac{C_T-\frac{C_1{V}_1}{V_T},}{C_2}$

$C_1=\frac{C_2\frac{C_1{V}_1}{V_T}}{C_{2}w-C_T+\frac{C_1{V}_1}{V_T}},$

where $C_1{V}_1/V_T$ is the apparent ISC that is observed with EC suppression, and $w$ can be estimated by segmentation of coregistered proton images.

4CM model

The four-compartment model (4CM) [45] is a further refinement of the 3CM. Here, the CSF is considered a distinct compartment (i = 4), and

$V_1={\alpha }_1{V}_T,$

$V_2={\alpha }_2{V}_{T,}$

$V_3=\left(1-w\right)V_{T,}$

$V_4={\alpha }_4{V}_{T,}$

where ${\alpha }_i$ is the volume fraction of each liquid compartment, that is ${\alpha }_1+{\alpha }_2+{\alpha }_4=w$. The model uses the same assumptions of 3CM and considers $C_4=C_2\approx 140$ mmol/L. The model is conceptually similar to 3CM but includes a more realistic segmentation. The variables are $C_1$, and the volume fractions ${\alpha }_i$. The estimation requires the simulation of the signal and a multi-pulse sequence exploiting the different relaxation between compartments [45].

Compartmentalized sodium MRI in brain diseases

²³Na-MRI is sensitive to physiological and pathological processes that happen during the progression of several neurological diseases [50, 51]: in fact, many brain disorders show sodium concentration anomalies associated with sodium–potassium pump dysfunction or cellular membrane impairment, allowing a sodium MRI to target specific features of the pathology. Anomalies in overall sodium are often caused by an increase in the intracellular sodium concentration or the extracellular volume fraction. Therefore, differentiating the compartments can help and improve the diagnostic information of sodium imaging.

Anomalies in sodium levels play a crucial role in the pathophysiology of multiple sclerosis [52]. The most common form of MS is characterized by a first period of relapsing/remitting (RR) symptoms that later converts into a secondary progression phase (SPMS). RRMS is primarily characterized by demyelination, resulting in impairment of action potential conduction. The demyelinated axons can experience an overexpression of sodium channels along their membranes. Albeit this process re-establishes signal transduction and contributes to clinical remission in RRMS, it is responsible for higher sodium influx, resulting in an increased energy demand to maintain resting potential and sodium homeostasis. Moreover, intra-axonal sodium accumulation contributes to axonal degeneration by reversal of the sodium/calcium exchanger that increases intra-axonal calcium (Ca), ultimately causing irreversible damage, whose accumulation leads to SPMS [53–55].

Considering the fundamental role of sodium in MS, ²³Na-MRI has been widely employed. TSC has been studied in normal-appearing white matter (NAWM), normal-appearing grey matter (NAGM), CSF, and MS lesions [55–58]. Various studies have shown an increase of TSC in lesions as well as in cortical gray and white matter across primary, secondary, and relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) [55–57]. Additionally, sodium levels are linked to clinical measures of disability and impairment [57]. Studies on lesions have demonstrated that TSC is elevated in contrast-enhancing lesions, T₁ hypointense lesions, and T₁ isointense lesions, while non-enhancing lesions with a reduced apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) exhibit TSC levels that are comparable to those in NAWM. This consistency in TSC suggests that the tissue structure may be preserved early on, prior to any breakdown of the blood–brain barrier (BBB). Thus, TSC may represent a sensitive biomarker of chronic tissue abnormalities, BBB disruption, and vasogenic edema in contrast-enhancing lesions. Normal levels of TSC in lesions with a decreased ADC may indicate that the lesions are in an early stage [10, 59, 60].

The well-demonstrated increase of TSC in MS can be driven by intracellular sodium accumulation, expansion of the extracellular space, or both [57]. Strategies based on single-quantum, inversion recovery, and triple-quantum filtering have been used to disentangle the intracellular contribution [8]. Findings suggest that intracellular sodium concentration can give complementary information about MS lesions and inflammatory processes. Petracca et al. [8] found an increase in ISC in both WM and GM of RRMS patients; a decrease of the intracellular volume fraction was observed in several clusters in WM and GM, while changes at the whole-brain scale were significant only in WM. Interestingly, lesion burden and disability were correlated to TSC and intracellular volume fraction but not to ISC, suggesting that the latter is a consequence of early neuro/axonal metabolic dysfunction, while the former reflects tissue loss [8]. Studies on lesions have demonstrated a different intracellular concentration between hyperacute, acute, and chronic ones [61, 62], suggesting the sensitivity of ISC to reveal inflammatory mechanisms during the first stage of the disease (see Table 1).

Table 1

Table 1. Applications and main findings of sodium compartmentalization techniques in multiple sclerosis and brain tumors.

Alzheimer’s disease is characterized by extracellular deposits of β amyloid peptides (Aβ). Postmortem studies have shown a correlation between Aβ accumulation and ion imbalance [69–71]; disruption of Na⁺ homeostasis is induced by Aβ oligomers and is responsible for neuronal network destabilization in the early stage of the disease [71]. TSC was found to be high in AD patients, suggesting that sodium imbalance during the progression of the disease might have a key role in energy failure [72, 73]. However, recent ex vivo studies have shown that sodium increase in brain tissue does not correspond to an increase in the CSF, indicating that anomalies can be associated with the intracellular pool [69]. However, no direct evidence exists for this hypothesis so far.

Stroke is one of the most common causes of death and the leading cause of long-term disability. During a stroke, the blood flow in the brain is compromised, resulting in a breakdown of cellular energy production, followed by the piling of sodium and calcium in the intracellular compartment. A measure of intracellular sodium would have the benefit of being related to the direct pathological consequence of stroke. A study on non-human primates has shown that the duration of brain ischemia can be associated with a threshold on the TSC beyond which tissue reperfusion would be of little benefit [74]. Studies on humans have demonstrated how sodium can be considered a promising biomarker for tissue viability and cell integrity, and how its integration into clinical practice can have an impact on future diagnosis and treatments [75–77]. It is likely that knowledge about IC sodium would help personalized decisions on reperfusion.

Epilepsy is characterized by recurring seizures, causing a large inflow of sodium. Intracellular ²³Na-MRI is thus an obvious biomarker to quantify the physiological effects of seizures. Moreover, cell shrinkage and cerebral atrophy have been reported in epileptic areas [78, 79]. Both phenomena are associated with an increase in the extracellular volume fraction, resulting in an increase of TSC in the epileptogenic zone [80]. An increase in TSC in epileptogenic zones suggests intracellular sodium accumulation, even in interictal periods [81], and demonstrates long-term changes in sodium levels [80, 82]. A decrease in TSC was observed in a patient who suffered non-convulsive seizures during the scan, suggesting transient neuronal swelling and reduction of extracellular volume fraction [82]. Some recent studies [80, 83] investigated the ratio between T₂*_short and T₂*_long, showing an increase of the short component mainly localized to epileptogenic zones, whereas TSC was increased in all regions. These results suggest that a differential weighting of intracellular/extracellular sodium can be sufficient to highlight specific pathophysiological phenomena.

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is the result of acute events in which an external force damages the brain. TBI causes stretch-induced damage to the cell membranes along the axons, causing mechanical damage and mechanoporation [84], triggering ionic and proteolytic cascades, and ultimately resulting in disruption of ionic homeostasis. Sodium imbalances following mild TBI are associated with patient outcomes [85]. Surprisingly, a decrease of TSC in TBI was reported [84, 85], contrary to what could be expected. A recent longitudinal study [86] has investigated TSC levels 3 months after the injury, when no significant variations of TSC were found, suggesting normalization of the sodium ionic equilibrium.

Brain tumors represent another important application for ²³Na-MRI. The most aggressive are characterized by rapid cell proliferation and angiogenesis: both of these factors are linked to a reduced Na⁺-K⁺-ATPase activity [87], resulting in an increase of the intracellular sodium concentration. Cellular proliferation can also be associated with an increase in extracellular volume fraction [88]. The level of Na⁺ in malignant tumors is higher than in healthy tissues [46, 89–95]. IC sodium is thus a potential biomarker for cancer staging. Moreover, EC volume fraction is expected to increase following treatment. Therefore, compartmentalized sodium measurements are a promising biomarker for evaluating response to treatment. Studies on compartments have demonstrated a decrease in the signal associated with intracellular sodium (see Table 1) [30, 48, 64, 66, 96]. However, Nagel et al. [6] reported an increased IR signal (associated with intracellular sodium) for tumors with high proliferation rates: a positive correlation between the MIB-1 proliferation rate and the IR signal was found, and no correlation considering TSC values was found. These results suggest the potential of compartmentalization to discriminate among different types of brain tumors [6, 67] and their progression [68].

Technical remarks

The disentanglement of IC and EC sodium needs specific acquisition sequences and mathematical models. The scanning sequences developed for selective acquisition from a single compartment suffer from some limitations: they are based on the idea that intracellular and extracellular pools are composed of bound sodium and free sodium, respectively, and have different relaxation properties, but this hypothesis is likely an oversimplification, leading to partial or poor compartment specificity [97]. Moreover, all scanning approaches for compartmentalized sodium quantification suffer from poor SNR and a very long scanning time.

Sodium imaging is, in general, impaired by hardware and technical limitations. The challenge with RF technology for sodium MRI lies in the ability to detect small signals with very short T₂ relaxation times [98, 99], thus requiring high sensitivity and fast switching between transmit and receive modes. While most sodium coils used to be custom-built or handmade, commercial RF coils, including ²³Na/¹H birdcage coils and surface coils, are now available. Surface coils are more sensitive, but limited coverage and highly inhomogeneous B₁ field impair quantitative studies [98, 100]. In recent years, phased array sodium RF receive coils have been introduced. The efficient design of phased array receive coils and the added benefit of potential parallel imaging are attractive, but these coils necessitate correction methods for accurate sodium quantification [26, 101–103]. Acquisition strategies may also be optimized; recent studies have proposed methods to reduce scan time using postprocessing with convolutional neural networks [77] or fingerprinting to simultaneously acquire sodium density and sodium relaxation parameters and improve sodium MRI resolution [104–107].

Part of the ongoing research still relies on simulations and phantom studies. Phantoms with varying sodium and agar concentrations can simulate the relaxation behavior of compartments and aid in optimizing sequence parameters. However, further development is required regarding the quality of agar phantoms and the development of more stable alternatives to enhance optimization and sodium quantification [108].

Finally, improvements are expected from the diffusion of deep-learning-based methods for denoising or model optimization and fitting, but the relatively limited size of ²³Na datasets requires tailored solutions [109].

Conclusion

The first MRI studies on compartmentalization of ²³Na were presented more than 20 years ago. Because sodium compartmentalization is directly linked to cellular homeostasis, it can provide unique, relevant, and specific clinical information about tissue integrity and physiology in several serious pathologies, including cancer and neurodegenerative or neuroinflammatory diseases.

However, technical difficulties of scanning and postprocessing, as well as scanning time, currently make compartmentalized sodium imaging a tool for clinical research that is not expected to expand to clinical practice in the near future.

Author contributions

IE: investigation, visualization, and writing – original draft. MG: visualization and writing – review and editing. FG: conceptualization, funding acquisition, supervision, visualization, and writing – review and editing.

Funding

The author(s) declare that financial support was received for the research and/or publication of this article. The work was funded by the European Union – Next Generation EU – NRRP M6C2 – Investment 2.1 Enhancement and strengthening of biomedical research in the NHS under the grant PNRR-MAD-2022-12376889.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

References

1. Engl E, Attwell D. Non-signalling energy use in the brain. J Physiol (2015) 593(16):3417–29. doi:10.1113/jphysiol.2014.282517

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

2. Madelin G, Kline R, Walvick R, Regatte RR. A method for estimating intracellular sodium concentration and extracellular volume fraction in brain in vivo using sodium magnetic resonance imaging. Scientific Rep (2014) 4(1):4763–7. doi:10.1038/srep04763

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

3. Murphy E, Eisner DA. Regulation of intracellular and mitochondrial sodium in health and disease. Circ Res (2009) 104(3):292–303. doi:10.1161/circresaha.108.189050

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

4. Ha Y, Jeong JA, Kim Y, Churchill DG. Sodium and potassium relating to Parkinson's disease and traumatic brain injury. Met Ions Life Sci (2016) 16:585–601. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-21756-7_16

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

5. Nielles-Vallespin S, Weber M, Bock M, Bongers A, Speier P, Combs SE, et al. 3D radial projection technique with ultrashort echo times for sodium MRI: clinical applications in human brain and skeletal muscle. Magn Reson Med Official J Int Soc Magn Reson Med (2007) 57(1):74–81. doi:10.1002/mrm.21104

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

6. Nagel AM, Bock M, Hartmann C, Gerigk L, Neumann JO, Weber MA, et al. The potential of relaxation-weighted sodium magnetic resonance imaging as demonstrated on brain tumors. Invest Radiol (2011) 46(9):539–47. doi:10.1097/rli.0b013e31821ae918

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

7. Ridley B, Nagel AM, Bydder M, Maarouf A, Stellmann JP, Gherib S, et al. Distribution of brain sodium long and short relaxation times and concentrations: a multi-echo ultra-high field 23Na MRI study. Scientific Rep (2018) 8(1):4357. doi:10.1038/s41598-018-22711-0

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

8. Petracca M, Vancea RO, Fleysher L, Jonkman LE, Oesingmann N, Inglese M. Brain intra- and extracellular sodium concentration in multiple sclerosis: a 7 T MRI study. Brain (2016) 139(Pt 3):795–806. doi:10.1093/brain/awv386

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

9. Fleysher L, Oesingmann N, Stoeckel B, Grossman RI, Inglese M. Sodium long-component T mapping in human brain at 7 Tesla. Magn Reson Med Official J Int Soc Magn Reson Med (2009) 62(5):1338–41. doi:10.1002/mrm.22133

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

10. Huhn K, Engelhorn T, Linker RA, Nagel AM. Potential of sodium MRI as a biomarker for neurodegeneration and neuroinflammation in multiple sclerosis. Front Neurol (2019) 10:84. doi:10.3389/fneur.2019.00084

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

11. Shah NJ, Worthoff WA, Langen KJ. Imaging of sodium in the brain: a brief review. NMR Biomed (2016) 29(2):162–74. doi:10.1002/nbm.3389

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

12. Madelin G, Lee JS, Regatte RR, Jerschow A. Sodium MRI: methods and applications. Prog Nucl Magn Reson Spectrosc (2014) 79:14–47. doi:10.1016/j.pnmrs.2014.02.001

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

13. Madelin G, Regatte RR. Biomedical applications of sodium MRI in vivo. J Magn Reson Imaging (2013) 38(3):511–29. doi:10.1002/jmri.24168

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

14. Hilal S, Maudsley AA, Simon HE, Perman WH, Bonn J, Mawad ME, et al. In vivo NMR imaging of tissue sodium in the intact cat before and after acute cerebral stroke. Am J Neuroradiology (1983) 4(3):245–9.

PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar

15. Hilal SK, Maudsley AA, Ra JB, Simon HE, Roschmann P, Wittekoek S, et al. In vivo NMR imaging of sodium-23 in the human head. J Comput Assist tomography (1985) 9(1):1–7. doi:10.1097/00004728-198501000-00001

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

16. Boada FE, Gillen JS, Noll DC, Shen GX, Thulborn KR. Data acquisition and postprocessing strategies for fast quantitative sodium imaging. Int J Imaging Syst Technol (1997) 8(6):544–50. doi:10.1002/(sici)1098-1098(1997)8:6<544::aid-ima6>3.0.co;2-a

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

17. Larson PE, Han M, Krug R, Jakary A, Nelson SJ, Vigneron DB, et al. Ultrashort echo time and zero echo time MRI at 7T. Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics. Biol Med (2016) 29:359–70. doi:10.1007/s10334-015-0509-0

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

18. Romanzetti S, Mirkes CC, Fiege DP, Celik A, Felder J, Shah NJ. Mapping tissue sodium concentration in the human brain: a comparison of MR sequences at 9.4Tesla. Neuroimage (2014) 96:44–53. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.03.079

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

19. Grodzki DM, Jakob PM, Heismann B. Ultrashort echo time imaging using pointwise encoding time reduction with radial acquisition (PETRA). Magn Reson Med (2012) 67(2):510–8. doi:10.1002/mrm.23017

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

20. Nagel AM, Laun FB, Weber M, Matthies C, Semmler W, Schad LR. Sodium MRI using a density-adapted 3D radial acquisition technique. Magn Reson Med Official J Int Soc Magn Reson Med (2009) 62(6):1565–73. doi:10.1002/mrm.22157

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

21. Gurney PT, Hargreaves BA, Nishimura DG. Design and analysis of a practical 3D cones trajectory. Magn Reson Med Official J Int Soc Magn Reson Med (2006) 55(3):575–82. doi:10.1002/mrm.20796

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

22. Lu A, Atkinson IC, Claiborne TC, Damen FC, Thulborn KR. Quantitative sodium imaging with a flexible twisted projection pulse sequence. Magn Reson Med (2010) 63(6):1583–93. doi:10.1002/mrm.22381

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

23. Pipe JG, Zwart NR, Aboussouan EA, Robison RK, Devaraj A, Johnson KO. A new design and rationale for 3D orthogonally oversampled k-space trajectories. Magn Reson Med (2011) 66(5):1303–11. doi:10.1002/mrm.22918

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

24. Bydder M, Samsonov AA, Du J. Evaluation of optimal density weighting for regridding. Magn Reson Imaging (2007) 25(5):695–702. doi:10.1016/j.mri.2006.09.021

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

25. Tan H, Zheng Y. Point spread function optimization for MRI reconstruction. In: Proceedings.(ICASSP'05). IEEE international conference on acoustics, speech, and signal processing, 2005. IEEE (2005).

Google Scholar

26. Gast LV, Platt T, Nagel AM, Gerhalter T. Recent technical developments and clinical research applications of sodium (23Na) MRI. Prog Nucl Magn Reson Spectrosc (2023) 138:1–51. doi:10.1016/j.pnmrs.2023.04.002

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

27. Qian Y, Panigrahy A, Laymon CM, Lee VK, Drappatz J, Lieberman FS, et al. Short-T2 imaging for quantifying concentration of sodium (23Na) of bi-exponential T2 relaxation. Magn Reson Med (2015) 74(1):162–74. doi:10.1002/mrm.25393

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

28. Fleysher L, Oesingmann N, Inglese M. B0 inhomogeneity-insensitive triple-quantum-filtered sodium imaging using a 12-step phase-cycling scheme. NMR Biomed (2010) 23(10):1191–8. doi:10.1002/nbm.1548

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

29. Fleysher L, Oesingmann N, Brown R, Sodickson DK, Wiggins GC, Inglese M. Noninvasive quantification of intracellular sodium in human brain using ultrahigh–field MRI. NMR Biomed (2013) 26(1):9–19. doi:10.1002/nbm.2813

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

30. Fiege DP, Romanzetti S, Mirkes CC, Brenner D, Shah NJ. Simultaneous single-quantum and triple-quantum-filtered MRI of 23Na (SISTINA). Magn Reson Med (2013) 69(6):1691–6. doi:10.1002/mrm.24417

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

31. Worthoff WA, Shymanskaya A, Shah NJ. Relaxometry and quantification in simultaneously acquired single and triple quantum filtered sodium MRI. Magn Reson Med (2019) 81(1):303–15. doi:10.1002/mrm.27387

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

32. Worthoff WA, Shymanskaya A, Lindemeyer J, Langen K, Shah NJ. Relaxometry and quantification in sodium MRI of cerebral gliomas: a FET-PET and MRI small-scale study. NMR Biomed (2020) 33(10):e4361. doi:10.1002/nbm.4361

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

33. Hubbard PS. Nonexponential nuclear magnetic relaxation by quadrupole interactions. J Chem Phys (1970) 53(3):985–7. doi:10.1063/1.1674167

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

34. Shporer M, Civan MM. Nuclear magnetic resonance of sodium-23 linoleate-water: basis for an alternative interpretation of sodium-23 spectra within cells. Biophysical J (1972) 12(1):114–22. doi:10.1016/S0006-3495(72)86074-0

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

35. Berendsen HJ, Edzes HT. The observation and general interpretation of sodium magnetic resonance in biological material. Ann New York Acad Sci (1973) 204(1):459–85. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1973.tb30799.x

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

36. Andrasko J. Nonexponential relaxation of 23Na+ in agarose gels. J Magn Reson (1969) 16(3):502–4. doi:10.1016/0022-2364(74)90233-9

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

37. Pekar J, Leigh JS. Detection of biexponential relaxation in sodium-23 facilitated by double-quantum filtering. J Magn Reson (1969) 69(3):582–4. doi:10.1016/0022-2364(86)90180-0

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

38. Riemer F, Solanky BS, Wheeler-Kingshott CA, Golay X. Bi-exponential 23Na T2* component analysis in the human brain. NMR Biomed (2018) 31(5):e3899. doi:10.1002/nbm.3899

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

39. Benkhedah N, Bachert P, Nagel AM. Two-pulse biexponential-weighted 23Na imaging. J Magn Reson (2014) 240:67–76. doi:10.1016/j.jmr.2014.01.007

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

40. Ra JB, Hilal S, Oh C. An algorithm for MR imaging of the short T2 fraction of sodium using the FID signal. J Comput Assist tomography (1989) 13(2):302–9. doi:10.1097/00004728-198903000-00022

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

41. Lommen JM, Probing the microscopic environment of physiological sodium ions through observation of the T2* relaxation (2007) .

Google Scholar

42. Stobbe R, Beaulieu C. In vivo sodium magnetic resonance imaging of the human brain using soft inversion recovery fluid attenuation. Magn Reson Med Official J Int Soc Magn Reson Med (2005) 54(5):1305–10. doi:10.1002/mrm.20696

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

43. Stobbe R, Boyd A, Smyth P, Emery D, Valdés Cabrera D, Beaulieu C. Sodium intensity changes differ between relaxation-and density-weighted MRI in multiple sclerosis. Front Neurol (2021) 12:693447. doi:10.3389/fneur.2021.693447

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

44. Benkhedah N, Bachert P, Semmler W, Nagel AM. Three-dimensional biexponential weighted (23)Na imaging of the human brain with higher SNR and shorter acquisition time. Magn Reson Med (2013) 70(3):754–65. doi:10.1002/mrm.24516

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

45. Gilles A, Nagel AM, Madelin G. Multipulse sodium magnetic resonance imaging for multicompartment quantification: proof-of-concept. Sci Rep (2017) 7(1):17435–19. doi:10.1038/s41598-017-17582-w

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

46. Ouwerkerk R, Bleich KB, Gillen JS, Pomper MG, Bottomley PA. Tissue sodium concentration in human brain tumors as measured with 23Na MR imaging. Radiology (2003) 227(2):529–37. doi:10.1148/radiol.2272020483

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

47. Madelin G, Babb J, Xia D, Regatte RR. Repeatability of quantitative sodium magnetic resonance imaging for estimating pseudo-intracellular sodium concentration and pseudo-extracellular volume fraction in brain at 3 T. PloS one (2015) 10(3):e0118692. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0118692

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

48. Nunes Neto LP, Madelin G, Sood TP, Wu CC, Kondziolka D, Placantonakis D, et al. Quantitative sodium imaging and gliomas: a feasibility study. Neuroradiology (2018) 60:795–802. doi:10.1007/s00234-018-2041-1

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

49. Go KG. The normal and pathological physiology of brain water. Adv Tech Stand Neurosurg (1997) 23:47–142. doi:10.1007/978-3-7091-6549-2_2

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

50. Hagiwara A, Bydder M, Oughourlian T, Yao J, Salamon N, Jahan R, et al. Sodium MR neuroimaging. Am J Neuroradiology (2021) 42(11):1920–6. doi:10.3174/ajnr.a7261

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

51. Zaric O, Juras V, Szomolanyi P, Schreiner M, Raudner M, Giraudo C, et al. Frontiers of sodium MRI revisited: from cartilage to brain imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging (2021) 54(1):58–75. doi:10.1002/jmri.27326

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

52. Bruschi N, Boffa G, Inglese M. Ultra-high-field 7-T MRI in multiple sclerosis and other demyelinating diseases: from pathology to clinical practice. Eur Radiol Exp (2020) 4:59–13. doi:10.1186/s41747-020-00186-x

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

53. Smith KJ. Sodium channels and multiple sclerosis: roles in symptom production, damage and therapy. Brain Pathol (2007) 17(2):230–42. doi:10.1111/j.1750-3639.2007.00066.x

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

54. Waxman SG. Axonal conduction and injury in multiple sclerosis: the role of sodium channels. Nat Rev Neurosci (2006) 7(12):932–41. doi:10.1038/nrn2023

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

55. Inglese M, Madelin G, Oesingmann N, Babb JS, Wu W, Stoeckel B, et al. Brain tissue sodium concentration in multiple sclerosis: a sodium imaging study at 3 tesla. Brain (2010) 133(3):847–57. doi:10.1093/brain/awp334

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

56. Zaaraoui W, Konstandin S, Audoin B, Nagel AM, Rico A, Malikova I, et al. Distribution of brain sodium accumulation correlates with disability in multiple sclerosis: a cross-sectional 23Na MR imaging study. Radiology (2012) 264(3):859–67. doi:10.1148/radiol.12112680

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

57. Paling D, Solanky BS, Riemer F, Tozer DJ, Wheeler-Kingshott CAM, Kapoor R, et al. Sodium accumulation is associated with disability and a progressive course in multiple sclerosis. Brain (2013) 136(7):2305–17. doi:10.1093/brain/awt149

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

58. Maarouf A, Audoin B, Konstandin S, Rico A, Soulier E, Reuter F, et al. Topography of brain sodium accumulation in progressive multiple sclerosis. Biol Med (2014) 27:53–62. doi:10.1007/s10334-013-0396-1

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

59. Eisele P, Konstandin S, Griebe M, Szabo K, Wolf ME, Alonso A, et al. Heterogeneity of acute multiple sclerosis lesions on sodium (23Na) MRI. Mult Scler J (2016) 22(8):1040–7. doi:10.1177/1352458515609430

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

60. Eisele P, Konstandin S, Szabo K, Ebert A, Roßmanith C, Paschke N, et al. Temporal evolution of acute multiple sclerosis lesions on serial sodium (23Na) MRI. Mult Scler Relat Disord (2019) 29:48–54. doi:10.1016/j.msard.2019.01.027

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

61. Biller A, Pflugmann I, Badde S, Diem R, Wildemann B, Nagel AM, et al. Sodium MRI in multiple sclerosis is compatible with intracellular sodium accumulation and inflammation-induced hyper-cellularity of acute brain lesions. Scientific Rep (2016) 6(1):31269. doi:10.1038/srep31269

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

62. Mennecke AB, Nagel AM, Huhn K, Linker RA, Schmidt M, Rothhammer V, et al. Longitudinal sodium MRI of multiple sclerosis lesions: is there added value of sodium inversion recovery MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging (2022) 55(1):140–51. doi:10.1002/jmri.27832

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

63. Wiggins GC, Brown R, Fleysher L, Zhang B, Stoeckel B, Inglese M, et al. A nested dual frequency birdcage/stripline coil for sodium/proton brain imaging at 7T. In: Proc Intl Soc Mag Reson Med 18th Scientific Meeting (2010), Stockholm, Sweden, May 1–7, 2010:1500.

Google Scholar

64. Boada FE, Davis D, Walter K, Torres-Trejo A, Kondziolka D, Bartynski W, et al. Single and triple quantum sodium MRI of primary human brain tumors. In: Proc Intl Soc Mag Reson Med 11th Scientific Meeting (2003), Toronto, Canada, July 10–16, 2010:117.

Google Scholar

65. Shen GX, Boada FE, Thulborn KR. Dual-frequency, dual-quadrature, birdcage RF coil design with identical B1 pattern for sodium and proton imaging of the human brain at 1.5 T. Magn Reson Med (1997) 38(5):717–25. doi:10.1002/mrm.1910380507

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

66. Boada FE, Davis D, Walter K, Torres-Trejo A, Kondziolka D, Bartynski W, et al. Triple quantum filtered sodium MRI of primary brain tumors. In: 2004 2nd IEEE international symposium on biomedical imaging: nano to macro (IEEE cat No. 04EX821). IEEE (2004).

Google Scholar

67. Biller A, Badde S, Nagel A, Neumann JO, Wick W, Hertenstein A, et al. Improved brain tumor classification by sodium MR imaging: prediction of IDH mutation status and tumor progression. Am J Neuroradiology (2016) 37(1):66–73. doi:10.3174/ajnr.a4493

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

68. Bhatia A, Lee VK, Qian Y, Paldino MJ, Ceschin R, Hect J, et al. Quantitative sodium (23Na) MRI in pediatric gliomas: initial experience. Diagnostics (2022) 12(5):1223. doi:10.3390/diagnostics12051223

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

69. Graham SF, Nasarauddin MB, Carey M, McGuinness B, Holscher C, Kehoe PG, et al. Quantitative measurement of [Na+] and [K+] in postmortem human brain tissue indicates disturbances in subjects with Alzheimer's disease and dementia with Lewy bodies. J Alzheimers Dis (2015) 44(3):851–7. doi:10.3233/jad-141869

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

70. Vitvitsky VM, Garg SK, Keep RF, Albin RL, Banerjee R. Na+ and K+ ion imbalances in Alzheimer's disease. Biochim Biophys Acta (2012) 1822(11):1671–81. doi:10.1016/j.bbadis.2012.07.004

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

71. Pannaccione A, Piccialli I, Secondo A, Ciccone R, Molinaro P, Boscia F, et al. The Na(+)/Ca(2+)exchanger in Alzheimer's disease. Cell Calcium (2020) 87:102190. doi:10.1016/j.ceca.2020.102190

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

72. Haeger A, Bottlaender M, Lagarde J, Porciuncula Baptista R, Rabrait-Lerman C, Luecken V, et al. What can 7T sodium MRI tell us about cellular energy depletion and neurotransmission in Alzheimer's disease? Alzheimer's and Demen (2021) 17(11):1843–54. doi:10.1002/alz.12501

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

73. Mellon EA, Pilkinton D, Clark C, Elliott M, Witschey W, Borthakur A, et al. Sodium MR imaging detection of mild Alzheimer disease: preliminary study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol (2009) 30(5):978–84. doi:10.3174/ajnr.a1495

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

74. Boada FE, Qian Y, Nemoto E, Jovin T, Jungreis C, Jones SC, et al. Sodium MRI and the assessment of irreversible tissue damage during hyper-acute stroke. Translational stroke Res (2012) 3:236–45. doi:10.1007/s12975-012-0168-7

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

75. Thulborn KR, Davis D, Snyder J, Yonas H, Kassam A. Sodium MR imaging of acute and subacute stroke for assessment of tissue viability. Neuroimaging Clin North America (2005) 15(3):639–53, xi. doi:10.1016/j.nic.2005.08.003

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

76. Adlung A, Licht C, Reichert S, Özdemir S, Mohamed SA, Samartzi M, et al. Quantification of tissue sodium concentration in the ischemic stroke: a comparison between external and internal references for 23Na MRI. J Neurosci Methods (2022) 382:109721. doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2022.109721

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

77. Adlung A, Paschke NK, Golla A, Bauer D, Mohamed SA, Samartzi M, et al. 23Na MRI in ischemic stroke: acquisition time reduction using postprocessing with convolutional neural networks. NMR Biomed (2021) 34(4):e4474. doi:10.1002/nbm.4474

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

78. Bernhardt BC, Rozen DA, Worsley KJ, Evans AC, Bernasconi N, Bernasconi A. Thalamo-cortical network pathology in idiopathic generalized epilepsy: insights from MRI-based morphometric correlation analysis. Neuroimage (2009) 46(2):373–81. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.01.055

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

79. Liu RS, Lemieux L, Bell GS, Sisodiya SM, Bartlett PA, Shorvon SD, et al. Cerebral damage in epilepsy: a population-based longitudinal quantitative MRI study. Epilepsia (2005) 46(9):1482–94. doi:10.1111/j.1528-1167.2005.51603.x

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

80. Azilinon M, Makhalova J, Zaaraoui W, Medina Villalon S, Viout P, Roussel T, et al. Combining sodium MRI, proton MR spectroscopic imaging, and intracerebral EEG in epilepsy. Hum Brain Mapp (2023) 44(2):825–40. doi:10.1002/hbm.26102

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

81. Fisher RS, Scharfman HE, deCurtis M. How can we identify ictal and interictal abnormal activity? Adv Exp Med Biol (2014) 813:3–23. doi:10.1007/978-94-017-8914-1_1

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

82. Ridley B, Marchi A, Wirsich J, Soulier E, Confort-Gouny S, Schad L, et al. Brain sodium MRI in human epilepsy: disturbances of ionic homeostasis reflect the organization of pathological regions. Neuroimage (2017) 157:173–83. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.06.011

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

83. Azilinon M, Wang HE, Makhalova J, Zaaraoui W, Ranjeva JP, Bartolomei F, et al. Brain sodium MRI-derived priors support the estimation of epileptogenic zones using personalized model-based methods in Epilepsy. Netw Neurosci (2024) 8:673–96. doi:10.1162/netn_a_00371

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

84. Grover H, Qian Y, Boada F, Lakshmanan K, Flanagan S, Lui Y. MRI evidence of altered callosal sodium in mild traumatic brain injury. Am J Neuroradiology (2018) 39(12):2200–4. doi:10.3174/ajnr.a5903

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

85. Gerhalter T, Chen AM, Dehkharghani S, Peralta R, Adlparvar F, Babb JS, et al. Global decrease in brain sodium concentration after mild traumatic brain injury. Brain Commun (2021) 3(2):fcab051. doi:10.1093/braincomms/fcab051

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

86. Gerhalter T, Chen AM, Dehkharghani S, Peralta R, Gajdosik M, Zarate A, et al. Longitudinal changes in sodium concentration and in clinical outcome in mild traumatic brain injury. Brain Commun (2024) 6(4):fcae229. doi:10.1093/braincomms/fcae229

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

87. Leslie TK, James AD, Zaccagna F, Grist JT, Deen S, Kennerley A, et al. Sodium homeostasis in the tumour microenvironment. Biochim Biophys Acta Rev Cancer (2019) 1872(2):188304. doi:10.1016/j.bbcan.2019.07.001

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

88. Vargová L, Homola A, Zámečník J, Tichý M, Beneš V, Syková E. Diffusion parameters of the extracellular space in human gliomas. Glia (2003) 42(1):77–88. doi:10.1002/glia.10204

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

89. Kline RP, Wu EX, Petrylak DP, Szabolcs M, Alderson PO, Weisfeldt ML, et al. Rapid in vivo monitoring of chemotherapeutic response using weighted sodium magnetic resonance imaging. Clin Cancer Res (2000) 6(6):2146–56.

PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar

90. S AM, Adlung A, Ruder AM, Hoesl MAU, Schad L, Groden C, et al. MRI detection of changes in tissue sodium concentration in brain metastases after stereotactic radiosurgery: a feasibility study. J Neuroimaging (2021) 31(2):297–305. doi:10.1111/jon.12823

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

91. Thulborn KR, Davis D, Adams H, Gindin T, Zhou J. Quantitative tissue sodium concentration mapping of the growth of focal cerebral tumors with sodium magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Med Official J Int Soc Magn Reson Med (1999) 41(2):351–9. doi:10.1002/(sici)1522-2594(199902)41:2<351::aid-mrm20>3.3.co;2-8

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

92. Boada FE, Qian Y, Davis D, Lieberman F, Hamilton R, Mint A, Schwartz E, et al. Sodium MRI and 1H MRS in the diagnosis and monitoring of primary brain tumors. In: Proc Intl Soc Mag Reson Med 17th Scientific Meeting (2009), Honolulu, HI, United States, April 18–24, 2009:149.

Google Scholar

93. Kim S, Merugumala S, Lin AP. A uniformity correction method to reduce scan time for 7T sodium imaging of brain tumors. J Neuroimaging (2022) 32(6):1062–9. doi:10.1111/jon.13041

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

94. Huang L, Zhang Z, Qu B, Cui Z, Wang Y, Li J, et al. Imaging of sodium MRI for therapy evaluation of brain metastase with Cyberknife at 7T: a case report. Cureus (2018) 10(4):e2502. doi:10.7759/cureus.2502

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

95. Poku LO, Phil M, Cheng Y, Wang K, Sun X. 23Na-MRI as a noninvasive biomarker for cancer diagnosis and prognosis. J Magn Reson Imaging (2021) 53(4):995–1014. doi:10.1002/jmri.27147

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

96. Fiege DP, Development and application of multiple-quantum coherence techniques for in vivo sodium MRI at high and ultra-high field strengths (2014) .

Google Scholar

97. Burstein D, Springer CS. Sodium MRI revisited. Magn Reson Med (2019) 82(2):521–4. doi:10.1002/mrm.27738

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

98. Wiggins GC, Brown R, Lakshmanan K. High-performance radiofrequency coils for 23Na MRI: brain and musculoskeletal applications. NMR Biomed (2016) 29(2):96–106. doi:10.1002/nbm.3379

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

99. Bangerter NK, Kaggie JD, Taylor MD, Hadley JR. Sodium MRI radiofrequency coils for body imaging. NMR Biomed (2016) 29(2):107–18. doi:10.1002/nbm.3392

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

100. Giovannetti G, Flori A, Martini N, Francischello R, Aquaro GD, Pingitore A, et al. Sodium radiofrequency coils for magnetic resonance: from design to applications. Electronics (2021) 10(15):1788. doi:10.3390/electronics10151788

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

101. Wilferth T, Mennecke A, Gast LV, Lachner S, Müller M, Rothhammer V, et al. Quantitative 7T sodium magnetic resonance imaging of the human brain using a 32-channel phased-array head coil: application to patients with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. NMR Biomed (2022) 35(12):e4806. doi:10.1002/nbm.4806

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

102. Benkhedah N, Hoffmann SH, Biller A, Nagel AM. Evaluation of adaptive combination of 30-channel head receive coil array data in 23 N a MR imaging. Magn Reson Med (2016) 75(2):527–36. doi:10.1002/mrm.25572

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

103. Shajan G, Mirkes C, Buckenmaier K, Hoffmann J, Pohmann R, Scheffler K. Three-layered radio frequency coil arrangement for sodium MRI of the human brain at 9.4 Tesla. Magn Reson Med (2016) 75(2):906–16. doi:10.1002/mrm.25666

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

104. Kratzer FJ, Flassbeck S, Nagel AM, Behl NG, Knowles BR, Bachert P, et al. Sodium relaxometry using 23Na MR fingerprinting: a proof of concept. Magn Reson Med (2020) 84(5):2577–91. doi:10.1002/mrm.28316

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

105. Yu Z, Madelin G, Sodickson DK, Cloos MA. Simultaneous proton magnetic resonance fingerprinting and sodium MRI. Magn Reson Med (2020) 83(6):2232–42. doi:10.1002/mrm.28073

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

106. Kratzer FJ, Flassbeck S, Schmitter S, Wilferth T, Magill AW, Knowles BR, et al. 3D sodium (23Na) magnetic resonance fingerprinting for time-efficient relaxometric mapping. Magn Reson Med (2021) 86(5):2412–25. doi:10.1002/mrm.28873

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

107. Rodriguez GG, Yu Z, Shaykevich S, O'Donnell LF, Aguilera L, Cloos MA, et al. Super-resolution of sodium images from simultaneous 1H MRF/23Na MRI acquisition. NMR Biomed (2023) 36(10):e4959. doi:10.1002/nbm.4959

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

108. Hellerbach A, Schuster V, Jansen A, Sommer J. MRI phantoms–are there alternatives to agar? PloS one (2013) 8(8):e70343. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0070343

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

109. Iqbal I, Odesanmi GA, Wang J, Liu L. Comparative investigation of learning algorithms for image classification with small dataset. Appl Artif Intelligence (2012) 35(10):697–716. doi:10.1080/08839514.2021.1922841

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar